The uselessness of Canada's climate alarmism

[Anonymous]

The climate alarmism frenzy among politicians in  Canada would make propaganda minister Josef Goebbels blush. Drastic cuts in living standards, and steep increases in the cost of living in this country will not offset all the new coal fired power plants being brought online in China and India on a weekly basis and the likes of Liz may know that too.



By Lorne Gunter of Sun News Media



With nearly every candidate in the current federal election kowtowing at the Altar of Climate Doom (and an increasing number of municipal councils declaring "climate emergencies"), it's important to understand just how useless it would be even if we sacrificed Canada's entire economy in an attempt to save the planet.



There is no practical way to reduce our carbon emissions by 30 per cent below their levels in 2005 or reach "net zero" emissions by 2030 or even 2050.



That makes every party's climate commitments meaningless, since all of them (except the People's Party) have pledged (roughly) to achieve one or the other of these two goals.



But say it was possible to reduce carbon dioxide production so drastically, just what would that require?



We could stop every new pipeline ever dreamt up by oil companies (and under the Trudeau Liberals that is effectively what Ottawa has done), but that wouldn't even come close.



We could prohibit the use of every vehicle in Canada — and I mean every one. Every bus, car, pickup, semi, train, boat, airplane and tractor. No more commuting to work or school, no more mechanized farming (oxen anyone?), no more deliveries to grocery stores, no more trips anywhere you couldn't walk or bike. Nothing.



Even if we did that, we would only reach two-thirds of the goals pledged by our illustrious political leaders.



We'd also have to stop building any and all new buildings. That, combined with shutting down all transportation, might help us fulfill our promises.



Stopping all oil and gas production wouldn't do it either. (Besides it would be difficult to heat our homes in the middle of a Canadian winter using just dung-burning stoves.)



If we stopped all agriculture AND all manufacturing, that, too, would only get us two-thirds of the way there. Turning off all electricity production gets us only halfway.



So the eco promises of our political party's (except the PPC) are so fantastical they're meaningless. Never going to happen.



Consider that in four years under the greener than-thou Liberals, Canada has increased it's CO2 production by roughly as much as it increased in the last four years of the Harper government.



But let's play-act at being a Canadian political leader for a second and pretend we could return Canadians' standard of living to mid-19th Century levels — without heated hospitals or reading lamps or paved roads, televisions, refrigerators and phones.



Even if we turned out all the lights and shut down all the life-saving machines, Canada's contribution to global carbon dioxide is so small that our society-wide suffering and lowered life expectancy would do nothing to stop climate change.

For one thing, man-made greenhouse gas emissions are only three per cent to five per cent of the worldwide annual total. The rest (95 per cent or more) comes from natural sources such as oceans, decaying plants and carcasses and other natural processes.



Of that small amount, Canada contributes just 1.6 per cent — a tiny fraction of a tiny fraction.



If all the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere were a case of 24 one-litre water bottles, CO2 would be one bottle. The manmade contribution would be 50 ml and Canada's contribution would be 0.8 ml — less than half a thimbleful. (The whole atmosphere — greenhouse and non-greenhouses gases — would be 2,400 bottles.)



Do you honestly think shutting down major industries and radically altering our lifestyles to prevent the production of one-sixth of a thimbleful of CO2 is really going to save the Earth?



Or is it merely going to let us feel morally smug as we sit in our cold, dark shacks dying from easily preventable diseases?



Consider that China, the world's largest emitter, contributes somewhere between 10 and 15 times as much CO2 as Canada does. And it has added an amount equivalent to our entire production every three to four years.

[Anonymous]

The first casualty and sacrificial lamb in Ottawa's useless war on our emissions will be our oil and gas sector.

From Sun News Media



DEEP DIFFERENCES

Little support for Alberta oil and gas from federal party leaders and provinces



Four of the five federal party leaders have cast their lot, supporting policies that mean the end of oil and gas.



The worst-case outcome of the federal election would be a Liberal minority government, kept in power in coalition with either the NDP or the Greens, both deeply opposed to any new oil pipelines out of Alberta/ Saskatchewan, both seeking sooner-rather-than-later closure of the oilsands.



There is huge opportunity for Canadian oil and gas to be part of the solution to climate change — as has been detailed ad nauseam in this column over the last five years.



The only deal the Liberals can make to stay in power is with the Greens and/or the NDP. And that deal would have to include a tacit agreement to screw the economies of Alberta and Saskatchewan, to move hard and fast to fight global warming by accelerating the end of oil (and to a lesser degree natural gas) production and use in Canada.



Global warming solutions — using Canadian oil, natural gas and made-in-alberta technological advances — are at hand.



Every day, it seems, reports of new technologies lowering greenhouse gas emissions come out of the Canadian energy industry.



Replacing water with recyclable solvents, shipping solidified bitumen, simplifying the bitumen upgrading process ... the list goes on and on.



Alberta has been a long-simmering pot. If the heat is turned up by other Canadians wanting to cripple our economy "for the greater good", that pot will go to a full-tilt boil.

[Anonymous]

This election is about throwing Alberta and Saskatchewan under the bus.

[Anonymous]

This election is about throwing Alberta and Saskatchewan under the bus.

All Canadians actually. Alberta and Saskatchewan first.

[Bricktop]

At the last election, the socialist party leader declared that the election would be about one thing...tackling climate change.



They lost the unlosable election.



Their new leader has now abandoned climate change as a central policy.

[Anonymous]

At the last election, the socialist party leader declared that the election would be about one thing...tackling climate change.



They lost the unlosable election.



Their new leader has now abandoned climate change as a central policy.

Aint happening here brother. Fuck I miss the real political spectrum in  Australia. Canada has left and lefter.

[Gaon]

We could prohibit the use of every vehicle in Canada — and I mean every one. Every bus, car, pickup, semi, train, boat, airplane and tractor. No more commuting to work or school, no more mechanized farming (oxen anyone?), no more deliveries to grocery stores, no more trips anywhere you couldn't walk or bike. Nothing.



Stopping all oil and gas production wouldn't do it either. (Besides it would be difficult to heat our homes in the middle of a Canadian winter using just dung-burning stoves.)



If we stopped all agriculture AND all manufacturing, that, too, would only get us two-thirds of the way there. Turning off all electricity production gets us only halfway.

Is that all that is required.

[Anonymous]

Simple isn't. You will probably go back to Israel.

[Anonymous]

No where is Trudeau's virtue signalling more obvious than on the climate change file.



By Lorrie Goldstein of Sun News Media



PM will keep pretending carbon tax works — it doesn't



With the federal election now over, what does it mean with regard to the issue of climate change, which many Canadians told pollsters was either their top concern, or in the top three?



Given the election of a Liberal minority government, the answer is simple.



Prime Minister Justin Trudeau will continue his failed climate policies, which will have no significant impact on industrial greenhouse gas emissions, either in Canada or globally.



Trudeau went into the election defending his carbon tax/ price policy, despite the fact it's a train wreck.



His carbon tax is $20 per tonne of emissions this year, rising to $50 per tonne in 2022. What happens after that is a mystery.



Everyone knows that if Trudeau is going to hit his United Nations' Paris climate accord target of reducing Canada's emissions to 30% below 2005 emission levels by 2030, his carbon taxes aren't going to get us there. This includes the UN, the federal environment commissioner and nine of 10 provincial auditors general, the parliamentary budget officer, and the Trudeau government itself, as stated in its own reports.



To reach that target — which the UN has already said is outdated and inadequate — the Trudeau government has been advised it will need a carbon tax of $100 to $300 per tonne of emissions by 2030.



Prior to the election, Environment Minister Cathrine Mckenna suggested the Trudeau government would freeze his carbon tax at $50 per tonne in 2022 and use other measures to achieve its Paris target.



Then she quickly backed off, given that this was inconsistent with previous government statements suggesting Trudeau's carbon tax would have to increase beyond $50 per tonne post-2022 to hit Trudeau's Paris target.



So now we have no idea of what the Liberals are planning to do.



Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer said if he won the election, he would scrap Trudeau's carbon tax, and its rebate system.



But as a result of the election, NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh (24 seats), Bloc Leader Yves-françois Blanchet (32 seats), and Green Party Leader Elizabeth May (3 seats), hold the balance of power in Trudeau's minority Liberal government.



All have called for more stringent measures to combat climate change than Trudeau's plan. That means Trudeau will be pressured to raise his carbon tax above $50 per tonne post-2022, and to take additional measures to reach Canada's Paris accord targets than those in place today.



Whatever Trudeau does, he will in reality simply continue the three-decade tradition of Liberal and Conservative governments setting and then failing to meet their emission reduction targets.



As George Monbiot, one of the world's leading climate change journalists, explained in his 2006 book, Heat: How To Stop The Planet From Burning, that's what most people living in industrialized countries want: "Our response (to climate change) will be to demand that the government acts, while hoping that it doesn't. We will wish our governments pretend to act. We get the moral satisfaction of saying what we know to be right, without the discomfort of doing it ... political parties in most rich nations have already recognized this. They know that we want tough targets, but that we also want those targets to be missed. They know that we will grumble about their failure to curb climate change, but that ... nobody ever rioted for austerity."



Instead, we'll accept Trudeau's carbon pricing scheme that isn't going to work, while pretending it will.

[Anonymous]

It's hard enough as it is in this country making ends meet unless you are a doctor, lawyer, celebrity or refugee. Taxing people into poverty with increasing carbon cash grabs is not helping.



Four years and four months, I am out of here.

[Anonymous]

https://business.financialpost.com/diane-francis/when-foreigners-began-attacking-canadas-oil-industry-ottawa-turned-a-blind-eye-now-its-getting-worse

When foreigners began attacking Canada's oil industry, Ottawa turned a blind eye. Now it's getting worse

Diane Francis: Foreign money funds anti-pipeline lobbyists resulting in Liberals' economically suicidal legislation like Bill C-69



In 2015, a report showed how foreign money poured in to help the Liberals and anti-oil forces but nothing changed.



Then in 2017, it was obvious that social media and foreign vested interests contributed to the electoral victory in B.C. by the anti-oil NDP and Green Parties.



The NDP and Greens — and now the Liberals with two disastrous pieces of legislation aimed against Alberta oil — march alongside the damaging "Tar Sands Campaign" south of the border that aims to strand Canada's most valuable resource assets.



So far, their efforts have cost all Canadians. The $36-billion Malaysia LNG project in B.C. was cancelled, TransCanada Corp.'s Energy East west-east pipeline has been blocked, and the Trans Mountain expansion to the Pacific has been stalled for years.



Canadian oil has been on Russian, Venezuelan, and Saudi radar screens for years because Alberta's increasing production levels threatened their markets and prices. As far back as 2011, I exposed a primitive scheme involving the attempted blockage of deliveries by trucks of gigantic oilsands equipment on its way through Montana to Alberta. A U.S. official revealed that letters and lobbying in Montana originated out of Russia, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia and other oil-producing jurisdictions.



Their efforts have become more sophisticated, across Canada, and have helped push the Liberals to pass Bill C-69 (which will impede all resource development with endless consultations) and Bill C-48, the West Coast tanker ban. Both are economically suicidal, given Canada's huge resource base.



The oil tanker ban is discriminatory and doesn't apply to oil deliveries from Saudi Arabia to the Irving Oil refinery, from rigs off Newfoundland's coast, or to oil deliveries made to refineries in Quebec.



Worse, Ottawa has not presented any economic study or scientific research that supports its West Coast ban.



Newly elected Alberta Premier Jason Kenney has finally promised to do what Ottawa should have done years ago — hold a public inquiry into the funding of environmental organizations that have campaigned against pipelines, namely three B.C.-based organizations.



He also plans to submit challenges to the Canada Revenue Agency concerning the charitable status of those groups involved in the Tar Sands campaign, and will cut off any provincial government funding to groups that have been involved in it, including the Pembina Institute.



"I have a message to those foreign-funded special interests who have been leading a campaign of economic sabotage against this great province," he said. "To the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, to the Tides Foundation, to Leadnow, to the David Suzuki Foundation and to all of the others, your days of pushing around Albertans with impunity just ended."



Moreover, Ottawa should investigate the use of the tax system and social media, to protect Canadians against foreigners and unidentified vested interests that aim to sabotage the country and its democracy.

[Anonymous]

As long as they help the Liberals get elected, they interfere with impunity.

[Anonymous]

As long as they help the Liberals get elected, they will interfere with impunity.

You have become cynical. I like it.

[Anonymous]

As long as they help the Liberals get elected, they will interfere with impunity.

You have become cynical. I like it.

A lot has changed in the last ten years.

[Anonymous]

Anything Justine does is bullshit.